We have been running SQL server 2012 Enterprise Evaluation version on our new DB server for last two weeks.
Things were working well for us until last night when we applied a SQL server 2012 standard license on this DB. We are seeing that after applying standard license DB our queries are taking much longer time to execute. This is not just an issue with one or two queries we are seeing this behaviour for all queries.
Is this behaviour because of license changes? Is there any way I can confirm this is actually because of license change?
It may very well be due to the license change. SQL Server Standard edition has limits on the number of processors and amount of memory that it can use. SQL Server Enterprise edition does not. Here is a link to an article with the specifics:
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc645993(v=sql.110).aspx
Verifying that would be a challenge, unless you have another server box available with comparable horsepower where you can install SQL Server 2012 Enterprise Evaluation and then do side-by-side comparisons.
Related
I have a problem where using the column-based storage feature in SQL Server 2012 would help out a lot. There are already a bunch of people using earlier versions of SQL Server that won't be able to upgrade.
In theory, is it possible to create a table that works optimally on both?
I'm hoping that a client running any SQL Server reports could work both against a 2012 columnar instance and a non-columnar standard instance table where the only difference is the 2012 one is faster.
Is this doable?
What would I need to watch out for when reading/writing massive amounts of data in a storage-type agnostic way?
Thanks
It's definitely possible to have SQL queries that are compatible both with earlier version of SQL and with 2012. Most things should be fine unless you were using deprecated functionality in the earlier versions or the new features from 2012 (you'd probably know if you were).
Here's a link to Microsoft's summary of changes in SQL 2012 that you might need to watch out for http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc707787.aspx.
I am a junior developer and about to get my feet wet in my first "real" project. However we are trying to figure out a way to set everything up as the current developer lives out of country.
I was told to install certain programs, subversion clients and SQL Server 2000.
It does not seem that SQL Server 2000 can be installed on Windows 7. Are there inherent issues with me developing in a higher version of SQL Server like 2005? Is there an issue with stored procedures that can not be properly translated from on SQL Server version to another?
Again, I'm fairly new at this; please let me know if this is just a bad idea, impossible and any other guidance you can provide.
There are many features in newer versions of MSSQL that were not there in 2000 (multi-row inserts, newer hashing algorithms, and VARCHAR(MAX) to name a few). If you're using SQL Server Management Studio, it will not check these differences for you, even if you are connected to a SQL server 2000 database - it automatically uses 2008 rules for its syntax highlighting. Because of this it's easy to accidentally write code that's not 2000-compatible.
As far as getting 2000 running, if you have the install disk for an older version of windows, you could run a VM (http://www.microsoft.com/windows/virtual-pc/) and install the database server there. If your company has a separate development environment, you could create a copy of the production database to work off of as well.
The newer versions of SQL server bring new language and database features, if you write something using a feature that is available in SQL 2005 and not 2000 i.e. PIVOT then when you try and promote this to live then it will just get a syntax error.
There is no translation, if you went back in time 11 years, you'd still speak English you'd just get an odd look if you talked about 'Tweeting'.
You can set the database compatibility level to an earlier version for the specific database you are working on. This will stop you using the more modern features.
For the most part, you won't run into issues is you're simply running standard stored procedures and SQL statements.
However, there are several things that might not work properly if you're not in sync. SQL2005 was a relatively major upgrade and instroduced quite a bit of new functionality.
I don't know what you've got for available resources - dollars, etc, but if you have an MSDN Subscription at a level that provides you access to operating systems, then I would strongly recommend setting up a virual machine with an older version of Windows using your MSDN licenses, just to keep things on an even playing field.
My company is planning to migrate it's intranet/internet based ERP to the latest form of MS SQL Database available.
Presently we are using SQL Server 2000 Professional.
And we are planning to shift to SQL Server 2008 Web edition.
Please tell me whether this is the right step and whether it is feasible or not.
Thank you in advance.
"Please tell me whether this is the right step " - that's something you and your company need to decide.
It is feasible, and in the majority of cases straight forward.
Your first step should be to run the Microsoft SQL Server 2008 Upgrade Advisor
Microsoft SQL Server 2008 R2 Feature Pack contains the Microsoft SQL Server 2008 R2 Upgrade Advisor
Formulate and test a rollback plan
Determine your upgrade window and acceptable downtime.
Ensure database consistency: Run DBCC CHECKDB on databases to be upgraded to ensure that they are in a consistent state before performing the upgrade.
Back up all important files: Back up all SQL Server databases from the instance to be upgraded (including master, model and msdb), data and transaction log files, as well as any application files, script files, extract files, etc. so that you can completely restore them in the event of a failure.
It's both feasible and easy. The path from one version of SQL Server to another is usually pretty simple. Do you have any special stored procedures or reports generated in SQL Server that need to be rewritten/re-imported?
As far as right step - the question is, Why? If it's working, do you really need to mess with it?
If it's for intranet (some app for your internal usage) then consider using SQL 2008 Express edition. It's free and you can use it as an instance running along the full 2000 version. That way you will have some extra features from the full version.
But you have to know that applications running on SQL 2000 may not work on 2008 and they are even more probable not to work on 2008 R2.
We have a Sql Server 2005 Standard Edition running on a Production website. We'd like to move to a cloud hosting but they only offer Sql Server Express Edition on there.
My question is, will there be any problems in moving over? We only use tables, views, stored procedures and a few user defined functions. And we also have a Backup Maintenance Plan in place. Will any if this change?
WHat other limitations/problems (if any) can we expect to have? And is it a good idea to run on Express in Production?
And I would like to add, will it be OK if we moved from SQL server 2005 Standard to Sql Server 2008 Express - what possible problems there could be with this move?
There are limitations for SQL Server 2005 Express as listed here
These include:
- max 1GB RAM only
- max DB size of 4GB
- 1 CPU
Theses restrictions may cause you a problem. See the full list in the link.
With regrd to moving from 2005 Standard, to 2008 Express, then I expect the limitations of Express Edition may be the main factor when you consider if it really is an option. The limitations for 2008 Express are similar, see here.
Hope this helps
The migration im unsure.
Express does not support triggers (fully), nor SQL scheudling.
Its size is limited to 4GB.
You can only ever have one instance with express.
It does however support Full Text and Reporting Services (in the express advanced edition)
We have plenty of clients running SQL Express due to cost. Only small pain has been the need to write a windows service for a job that could be easily run in proper SQL scheduling in the paid for the version.
Im sure there are many more differences but these are the ones im aware of, hope this helps.
I've used SQL Server Express for simple data persistence in production with no issues.
From the looks of your situation the only feature that will not be supported is backup maintenance. However, if you're hosted on a cloud, your ISP should take care of backup for you.
I am about to move servers and i was talking to somebody and they suggested using sql server express 2008 installed on the servers. I have full access to the server.
Does this express engine work at the same speed (performance) as a true sql server 2008?
I know about the limitations i..e max 4 GB per DB ... and max 1 GB of ram... Considering the server has 2GB installed and is shared with windows... i don't see this being a problem but would love to hear some feedback..
I have around 4 dbs .. and they have maybe 4 users logged into them at the same time, its not a great deal of use really...
What i really trying to mesure up is if i should installed SQL SERVER 2008 FULL version on the server or express..
Any help with a choice would be really helpful.
It appears express uses the same DB engine as the FULL version ...
I don't need any clever replication, clustering or things like that...
But i want to go down the right path ...
Any help really appreciated
Express is the same code as the other SQL editions (Workgroup, Standard, Enterprise/Developer and Data Center). The only different code base is the 'CE' edition, that is based on the mobile SQL CE code. Express has the restrictions you already enumerated (DB size, RAM) and also is using only one scheduler, so in effect will use only one CPU core. Also certain features are restricted in Express, like certain replication scenarios. The biggest advantage is that customers can start with Express and if they out-grow its capabilities they can swap in a higher edition without any application change, the database files are interchangeable between all editions, including Express.
Its the same engine, but I found you have to fight it all the way in making it anything but a desktop-environment database, from management to tcpip configuration, etc. And of course, it has built in limits on database size and resource usage. Once it is configured the way you want though, it runs fine. In real production settings I find the lack of SSIS quite the killer, though.
So the bottom line is that it is usable, but not great. You might also consider the Workgroup edition, which is reasonably priced and less limited, but of course it is more expensive than free.
Just to add to this SQL Express 2008 R2 can use multiple cores (but only 1 CPU).
You'll probably be fine with Express. It's the same basic engine. If you ever want to upgrade, the process should be rather painless.
you should be fine, performance should be similar to full version in your case since your databases are small